People shouldn't sell Kassian short. THis is his FIRST year pro and he's already forced his way onto an NHL roster. He was essentially a point per game rookie out of the gate in the AHL scoring a a rate of half a goal a game. His NHL stats don't blow you away but 7 points in 27 games as a first year power forward and averaging 12 minutes of icetime is nothing to dismiss. Those are good numbers.

DO the canucks lose something on the third line? Perhaps they lose some offense, though as much as I like Cody to me it looked like he was beginning to a wall. COuld he step it up down the stretch and in the playoffs? Perhaps but also a possibility he struggles a lot. No idea really, but I don't think he was going to be the saviour of the team in the playoffs.

Cornuck wrote:Gutsy move by Gillis. Emerging prospect for an emerging, bigger prospect. Time will tell on this one, but I have to trust Gillis on this one.

Good luck to Cody.

Ahhhhh fuddley duddley.... MG was damned if he did and damed if he did....the time for a bit of a risk is now peeps of the Johnny Canucks...the playing it safe last year puttered out in game seven....REMEMBER?! We didn't bet the future, this is the future...

Good luck to the kid indeed...and Sulzer gets to speak Deutsch with Erhoff...now don't forget the trade day deadline humour...

tantalum wrote:DO the canucks lose something on the third line? Perhaps they lose some offense, though as much as I like Cody to me it looked like he was beginning to a wall. COuld he step it up down the stretch and in the playoffs? Perhaps but also a possibility he struggles a lot. No idea really, but I don't think he was going to be the saviour of the team in the playoffs.

I think Cody would have been relegated to 4th line spot duty once the games that count began.

I really like Hodgson and think he's going to be a good player in this league for years, but you have to give to get. There is certainly no guarantee that Hodgson will become a first line centre on a contending team, and his size and physicaly certainly leave something to be desired.

Outside of Tanev, we don't have a young defenseman who looks like a lock to be a top four defenseman, and Kassian will provide something immediately that we have not had for years. You guys are convincing me that this is a good trade. I don't think there is a clear winner, but both teams have addressed some needs.

With Bitz, Kassian and even Weise, this team is bigger and tougher than last year's edition of the Canucks. I like this.

This qualifies as a straight-up hockey trade to me - giving up one top-notch prospect for 2 second-notch prospects.

But I agree, I don't get the timing. If Kassian was available now, would he not be available in the off-season? Its not like Buffalo needed Hodgson for a cup run.

Overall I really like the trade from an organizational standpoint. The Canucks have filled two holes on the prospect depth chart, while only moving one piece. But in terms of who will contribute more this off-season...I'm not so sure.

I think the winner of this trade hinges on Pahlsson's play. If he does take Kesler's PK time and is effective on a shutdown 3rd line, the Canucks come out way ahead. And as much as I love Cody, I don't see him developing into a PPG guy in the Buffalo system, where their first line is about as skilled as our 3rd line.

However, in terms of who would have a bigger impact this off-season...I'm no so sure.

This isn't Hodgson for Kassian. It is Hodgson + extra salary for Kassian and Gragnani.

They say that the player that gets the best player wins the trade. If that's the case, the Canucks have an 85% of losing this trade. Cody Hodgson was far from perfect, but he is now a decent NHL player and should have a good NHL career. Kassian might well develop into an all-star power forward -- or into a journeyman who gets frequently traded on what-could-be. But...

Gragnani is the player that should have an immediate impact. He will likely replace Tanev right away as the 3rd pairing RD. And he can play on the power play. Put up unbelievable numbers in the AHL and earned 22 minutes a night last year in the playoffs. The rookie season hasn't been perfect, but he's a modest upgrade over Tanev and has the potential to be much more. GMMG loves NHL ready defensemen on ELC's; Gragnani's the next best thing -- a cheap RFA (absent an offer sheet).

Kassian's job is to play with the Sedins once Alex Burrows departs for free agency. For now, I'm not sure. But if he looks good, he'll get a look in the top 9. While it is a solid and deep group, it isn't like Higgins, Raymond, and Hansen can't use some competition.

Some posters on here were agitating that we get more traditional in the line approach, and I think that is the result of today's deals. The third line will look more like a checking line. The fourth line will agitate or check as necessary. Personally, I thought that for every match-up problem the Canucks faced because they lacked a traditional second line, they were creating serious match up problems for the opposition because Sedin, Kesler, or Hodgson was going to be on the ice 80+% of the ES time and that the Canucks could deploy one of the best 3 or 4 shutdown centers in the game (Kesler) at any time they wanted to change his responsibilities. GMMG and likely AV disagreed. That doesn't suprise me too much. The suprise is that they didn't get a big time wing now with Hodgson.

If you aren't going for a proven track record, a talented rookie center with some flaws in his game but can contribute now and has a high ceiling like Hodgson should be able to bring back a defenseman or a wing that can be described the same way. Neither Kassian or Gragnani fit that description (though together they do...), but both certainly have upsides. The good news is that GMMG is constantly analyzing the future; the bad news is that I don't think the Canucks are a better team today.